Skip to comments.
Earth more sensitive to carbon dioxide than previously thought
University of Bristol ^
| Dec 6, 2009
| Unknown
Posted on 12/06/2009 11:42:52 AM PST by decimon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
1
posted on
12/06/2009 11:42:52 AM PST
by
decimon
To: decimon; steelyourfaith; xcamel
Sensitivity training ping.
2
posted on
12/06/2009 11:43:48 AM PST
by
decimon
To: SunkenCiv
Is this a ‘humor’ article?
To: decimon
Hmmm ... sounds like the kids in Bristol are no longer sharp as a crystal.
To: decimon
Bwaaaaaahaaaahaaaaahaaaaaaa!......These people are reallllly naive.....now, the earth is hypersensitive to C02!!!!! Ooooooohhhhhhhhhh, boooooga boooooga!!!!!!!!!
A word to the wise, please don't click on any links. Mostly likely they have a hit counter racking up the hits to support a bullshit 'scientist consensus' tally. Jeeshh!!!!!
5
posted on
12/06/2009 11:46:27 AM PST
by
Gaffer
To: decimon
The Earth's temperature may be 30-50 percent more sensitive to atmospheric carbon dioxide than has previously been estimated, reports a new study published in Nature Geoscience this week Only problem is the study is based on fraudulent data. It is a situation of putting garbage in so we get garbage out.
6
posted on
12/06/2009 11:47:16 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(Demand Constitutionality)
To: decimon
They used to call it “GIGO”.
7
posted on
12/06/2009 11:47:55 AM PST
by
ReleaseTheHounds
("The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.")
To: decimon
8
posted on
12/06/2009 11:48:01 AM PST
by
Islam=Murder
(Hitler hated his Jewish side; Omoslem hates his white side.)
To: decimon
So Global Warming is being revealed as a scam. The numbers don't add up. The answer? Make the numbers work. So now, ah, CO2 is even worse than we thought for the atmosphere!
9
posted on
12/06/2009 11:48:03 AM PST
by
DesScorp
To: decimon
In the long term, the Earth's temperature may be 30-50% more sensitive to atmospheric carbon dioxide than has previously been estimated, reports a new study published in Nature Geoscience this week. My God!
We are killing ourselves 30-50% more than we originally thought!
Where's my wallet, we need to stop this bullet train! ROTFLMAO!
10
posted on
12/06/2009 11:48:07 AM PST
by
EGPWS
(Trust in God, question everyone else)
To: decimon
Put another way: Previous studies, made by the same people, are a bunch of hooey.
But we can trust this study!
To: decimon
WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE .... unless the United States is destroyed and becomes a turd world country.
What they DON’T say is that the CO2 concentrations FOLLOW the temperature changes and doesn’t CAUSE the changes.
12
posted on
12/06/2009 11:49:09 AM PST
by
Blood of Tyrants
(The Second Amendment. Don't MAKE me use it.)
To: MNJohnnie
These headlines always have qualifying words in them, “may”, “might”, “could”. This is not science, it’s guessing games.
To: decimon
LOL... more charlatans at work.
14
posted on
12/06/2009 11:49:25 AM PST
by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: decimon
"This led us to review what was missing from the model."
Oh!. Pick Me!!! I know: Your intelligence and credibility.
15
posted on
12/06/2009 11:49:27 AM PST
by
Psycho_Bunny
(ALSO SPRACH ZEROTHUSTRA)
To: decimon
Lunt said, "We found that, given the concentrations of carbon dioxide prevailing three million years ago, the model originally predicted a significantly smaller temperature increase than that indicated by the reconstructions. This led us to review what was missing from the model." Complete BS.
He has no way to know the prevailing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere 3 million years ago. No way to know how much volcanic activity was effecting the climate. No way to know the sunspot cycle.
This is just more political propaganda pretending to be "Science".
16
posted on
12/06/2009 11:50:13 AM PST
by
MNJohnnie
(Demand Constitutionality)
To: decimon
Since most people are sick of reading about this crap, here’s the money quote:
“The results show that components of the Earth’s climate system that vary over long timescales such as land-ice and vegetation have an important effect on this temperature sensitivity, but these factors are often neglected in current climate models.”
Note the last sentence. 18,000 years ago the spot where I’m sitting would have been covered with ice. The polar bears are going to be just fine.
17
posted on
12/06/2009 11:51:01 AM PST
by
bigbob
To: decimon
When is this BS going to stop?
18
posted on
12/06/2009 11:51:18 AM PST
by
Logical me
(Oh, well!!!)
To: decimon
19
posted on
12/06/2009 11:52:14 AM PST
by
pallis
To: decimon
20
posted on
12/06/2009 11:55:11 AM PST
by
Huskrrrr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson